Author Topic: The Object and The Hazard  (Read 1963 times)

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #30 on: May 15, 2017, 11:04:49 PM »
Right, so if I have a bigger stick than you, then other than your bias, there is no reason why I can't make you eat cow shit?  Are you Maoist?
Not a Maoist--must be and idiotist for trying to have a conversation with you.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Offline Baruch

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #31 on: May 16, 2017, 06:59:12 AM »
Not a Maoist--must be and idiotist for trying to have a conversation with you.

Just trying to clarify where you are coming from.  So basically you are uber-biased uber-bigoted?  I have to ask ... have you ever used Uber?
שלום

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #32 on: May 16, 2017, 09:22:27 AM »
Just trying to clarify where you are coming from.  So basically you are uber-biased uber-bigoted?  I have to ask ... have you ever used Uber?
No, you care nothing about where I'm coming from.  You are too addicted to clever word play.  Yes, you are very good at it, but it can get rather overbearing. 

I have never used Uber, but my son-in-law was an Uber driver in SF for a short while.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #33 on: May 16, 2017, 09:28:39 AM »
Just trying to clarify where you are coming from.  So basically you are uber-biased uber-bigoted?  I have to ask ... have you ever used Uber?

Uber^s cognate in english is super.
I am sure he has used the word supermen even one time.
In addition to it, he may have heard the word ubermensh which was used by nietchetze(not sure how it is spelled )

Offline Baruch

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #34 on: May 16, 2017, 01:09:30 PM »
No, you care nothing about where I'm coming from.  You are too addicted to clever word play.  Yes, you are very good at it, but it can get rather overbearing. 

I have never used Uber, but my son-in-law was an Uber driver in SF for a short while.

Continuing along the primrose path ... so meaning only means "your meaning" for you.  I am glad you aren't overbearing (my meaning is the one true meaning).  So if you get up one day and decide to start offing White people or some other group ... what should we do about that?  What is your excuse?  As a predator, you are within your rights.  Rights as established by governments, are just arbitrary BS by the upper class, right?
שלום

Offline Baruch

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #35 on: May 16, 2017, 01:11:48 PM »
Uber^s cognate in english is super.
I am sure he has used the word supermen even one time.
In addition to it, he may have heard the word ubermensh which was used by nietchetze(not sure how it is spelled )

Uber-mensch.  Yes .. it means Superman, as in Nietzsche, not as in Clark Kent.  But actually as "Man of Steel" means Stalin in Russian, this is a clever wordplay by the creators of the comic, to tie in with both Stalin and Hitler.  Those two are still the only political geniuses of the 20th century ... everything we do now, is still caught between the poles of their twin totalitarianism ... Enlightenment guys having tea and crumpets are .. way past their expire date.  Politically, we are Poles, being massacred by both E and W neighbors.
שלום

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #36 on: May 16, 2017, 02:23:20 PM »
Continuing along the primrose path ... so meaning only means "your meaning" for you.  I am glad you aren't overbearing (my meaning is the one true meaning).  So if you get up one day and decide to start offing White people or some other group ... what should we do about that?  What is your excuse?  As a predator, you are within your rights.  Rights as established by governments, are just arbitrary BS by the upper class, right?
Off on some sort of tangent, I see.  And one that makes sense to you--and only you.  You have lost me now.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Offline Baruch

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #37 on: May 16, 2017, 07:52:22 PM »
Off on some sort of tangent, I see.  And one that makes sense to you--and only you.  You have lost me now.

You have no rational basis for your decisions, other than rationalizations that don't hold water.  A universal problem.
שלום

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #38 on: May 16, 2017, 08:14:40 PM »
You have no rational basis for your decisions, other than rationalizations that don't hold water.  A universal problem.
Once again, you are referring to yourself and nobody else. 
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Offline Baruch

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #39 on: May 17, 2017, 05:47:23 AM »
Once again, you are referring to yourself and nobody else.

Life has no meaning, except for your arbitrary self dealing ... and that is rational?  I agree with you ... my life has no meaning, except for my arbitrary self dealing.  But I don't call that rational, it is irrational, and I don't bother rationalizing (BSing) it.  If you hate Southerners (the original point) because you feel like it ... fine, just don't say you are better than Hitler or Stalin.  People hate all sorts of people, a behavior as common as fleas.  Phobias are common too ... look up Francophobia ... and are commonly the source of hatreds.

Right now I hate all D behavior ... and it is irrational.  I hate R behavior too, but they aren't the agent provocateurs right now, like they were a year ago.  I irrationally hate 2/3 of American political behavior.  I think you do too, just not the same behaviors.
שלום

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #40 on: May 17, 2017, 08:55:03 AM »
Life has no meaning, except for your arbitrary self dealing ... and that is rational?  I agree with you ... my life has no meaning, except for my arbitrary self dealing.  But I don't call that rational, it is irrational, and I don't bother rationalizing (BSing) it.  If you hate Southerners (the original point) because you feel like it ... fine, just don't say you are better than Hitler or Stalin.  People hate all sorts of people, a behavior as common as fleas.  Phobias are common too ... look up Francophobia ... and are commonly the source of hatreds.

Right now I hate all D behavior ... and it is irrational.  I hate R behavior too, but they aren't the agent provocateurs right now, like they were a year ago.  I irrationally hate 2/3 of American political behavior.  I think you do too, just not the same behaviors.
Ah yes, semantics once again.  I don't think the fact that all that is Earth and on Earth is irrational--or rational.  It just is; it's happenstance in that all of this is on this one particular planet.  I don't think it is irrational for life to happen somewhere in this universe; it is a mathematical certainty that life would and will happen.  To subscribe rational or irrational anything to nature smacks of automatically including a god(s) into the mix.  I don't think that way--since you are a theist, you do.  Nature is not an entity.  It is not a thing.  It is simply the way the universe works.  Because we are a product of nature, we have no meaning in a universal sense.  We were not 'put' here for a reason.  We are happenstance.  The only meaning one has is the meaning the individual person gives to themselves. 

As for politics, I simply hate all of it.  The D's are cowards and stupid in their own self-defeating way.  The R's are simply totally self-serving at the top with the base being stupidly driven by fear.  The entire system is corrupt, with corporations having their way with the country. 
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Offline Baruch

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #41 on: May 17, 2017, 12:46:05 PM »
Ah yes, semantics once again.  I don't think the fact that all that is Earth and on Earth is irrational--or rational.  It just is; it's happenstance in that all of this is on this one particular planet.  I don't think it is irrational for life to happen somewhere in this universe; it is a mathematical certainty that life would and will happen.  To subscribe rational or irrational anything to nature smacks of automatically including a god(s) into the mix.  I don't think that way--since you are a theist, you do.  Nature is not an entity.  It is not a thing.  It is simply the way the universe works.  Because we are a product of nature, we have no meaning in a universal sense.  We were not 'put' here for a reason.  We are happenstance.  The only meaning one has is the meaning the individual person gives to themselves. 

As for politics, I simply hate all of it.  The D's are cowards and stupid in their own self-defeating way.  The R's are simply totally self-serving at the top with the base being stupidly driven by fear.  The entire system is corrupt, with corporations having their way with the country.

Thanks again for the conversation.  I had to tease out of you, your POV again ... because I am self-dealing.
שלום

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #42 on: May 17, 2017, 02:13:40 PM »
Thanks again for the conversation.  I had to tease out of you, your POV again ... because I am self-dealing.
Why 'tease' when all you had to do was ask a straight forward question?  But then, I do realize that is how your mind works--you would rather tease or play complicated word games than ask a straight forward question.  If you want to know my POV (not 'privately owned vehicle' as the Army likes to call them), just ask.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Offline Baruch

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #43 on: May 18, 2017, 03:59:33 AM »
Why 'tease' when all you had to do was ask a straight forward question?  But then, I do realize that is how your mind works--you would rather tease or play complicated word games than ask a straight forward question.  If you want to know my POV (not 'privately owned vehicle' as the Army likes to call them), just ask.

Right, but I didn't know how to get past your irrational hatreds.
שלום

Re: The Object and The Hazard
« Reply #44 on: May 18, 2017, 09:00:02 AM »


Ah yes, semantics once again.  I don't think the fact that all that is Earth and on Earth is irrational--or rational.  It just is; it's happenstance in that all of this is on this one particular planet.  I don't think it is irrational for life to happen somewhere in this universe; it is a mathematical certainty that life would and will happen.  To subscribe rational or irrational anything to nature smacks of automatically including a god(s) into the mix.  I don't think that way--since you are a theist, you do.  Nature is not an entity.  It is not a thing.  It is simply the way the universe works.  Because we are a product of nature, we have no meaning in a universal sense.  We were not 'put' here for a reason.  We are happenstance.  The only meaning one has is the meaning the individual person gives to themselves. 

As for politics, I simply hate all of it.  The D's are cowards and stupid in their own self-defeating way.  The R's are simply totally self-serving at the top with the base being stupidly driven by fear.  The entire system is corrupt, with corporations having their way with the country.

But how can nature be both everything and nothing, as per your words?

Is that not illogic?

Sent from my Alcatel_6055U using Tapatalk